|
|
|
WALKER: You know, we've got to learn how to walk and chew gum in Washington. You know, we need to be able to do more than one thing at a time. And that's why a commission is particularly critical, because we need to make progress on reinstituting budget controls. Social Security reform is easy. We can do that if we go about it the right way. Health care is the real challenge. And we do need tax reform, too. So if we had the right kind of commission with an up or down vote--and that's what's different from a number of the other recent commissions--then we could make progress on multiple fronts, and that's what we need.
QUICK: Have you reached out to the two campaigns? I mean, you said you've been across more than half the country. What about the two political candidates right now?
WALKER: Yes. I met with the top economic policy advisers of both of the campaigns--they both happen to be friends of mine--to help them understand where we're coming from in the foundation, what we believe is important. And I'm hopeful that the general election campaign will make fiscal responsibility and intergenerational equity a higher priority. But we'll wait and see.
QUICK: OK. You say that you're hopeful that the campaign will push that. Does that mean you didn't get a great reception from either one of these two when you sat down with them?
WALKER: Well, you know, that means most politicians like to gain votes rather than lose votes, OK? And that's why I think it's unrealistic to expect that they're going to get to a great level of specificity about, `Well, this is exactly what we're going to do to Social Security or taxes or health care.' That's why this proposal acknowledging the problem, endorsing this type of commission is the right way for both of them, because then they don't have to get into the specifics but yet they then have an ability to take on the issues after they're president. And for the sake of our country, our children and grandchildren, they need to.
QUICK: All right, Dave, we're going to talk more about the film later this morning. We'll also be joined by Pete Peterson coming up. But thank you for getting up early with us to talk about this right off the bat. And we'll get back to you just a little bit later this morning.
WALKER: Great.
QUICK: Again, we also have Warren Buffett who's with you this morning. We'll be talking more about "I.O.U.S.A.," but also the state of the economy. We're going to talk about the "Oracle of Omaha," where he's investing in the stock market right now--at least we'll try and get that out of him. Some of his investments, his thoughts on the state of the banking system. Stay tuned, this is a very special edition of SQUAWK BOX right here on CNBC.
CONTINUED: WHAT HAPPENED TO FANNIE & FREDDIE?
QUICK: All right, welcome back, everybody. As we mentioned a little earlier, the movie "I.O.U.S.A." premiered across the country last night, and we got the chance to host a live town hall in Omaha that was simulcast to theaters across the country last night. Our CNBC team was on the ground at some of those theaters across the country. They got the chance to catch up with crowds from the East Coast to the West Coast. And, Warren, a lot of them heard you were going to be at this town hall meeting, and so we had our cameras ask some of those people some questions that they wanted to pose to you. Are you ready?
BUFFETT: I'm ready.
QUICK: All right. Let's get to some...
BUFFETT: Where's the popcorn?
QUICK: Oh, there--they didn't provide popcorn quite this early...
BUFFETT: All right.
QUICK: ...but we do have some questions that are coming up. Let's get to the first question for Mr. Buffett.
Unidentified Man #1: Do you think there's a characteristic about American democracy that leads to American debt?
QUICK: A characteristic about American democracy that leads to American debt. What do you think?
BUFFETT: Well, there's nothing inappropriate about having debt in America. I mean, Berkshire has debt, and it's helped us grow over time. And it's when debt gets out of control that you worry. But the American democracy, it's always fun to spend a little more than you take in, and that applies to individuals, it applies to governments. And in a $14 trillion economy, having debt that's 60-odd percent of GDP is not inappropriate. It wasn't inappropriate when we had 120 percent of GDP in debt after World War II, because we had to fight a war.
QUICK: Although you can't expect to maintain deficits like that endlessly.
BUFFETT: Yeah, you can expect to maintain a deficit that's a given percentage of the GDP. I mean, Berkshire can expect to have debt forever, and the larger we get in terms of our equity and earning power, the more debt we can sustain. And I don't think our shareholders would want us to operate--take on some rule where we're going to operate debt-free in the future. So it's--what you worry about is when the debt starts spiraling out of control, when it goes up year after year after year as a percentage of GDP, because eventually when that occurs people--if you try to borrow money around the world in your own currency, the world will say no. That's what happened in South America in the past, it happened in the--in the Asian arena. We are able to borrow money in dollars. The world trusts the dollar. If we tried to run our debt up to 3- or 400 percent of GDP, nobody would want debt denominated in dollars.
QUICK: OK. Let's take another question. This one comes from Irvine, California.
Unidentified Man #2: Hey, Mr. Buffett, I would like to know what is going to happen with Fannie Mae. Are they going under?
QUICK: That was, again, what would be the best investment to hedge against the upcoming debt crisis?
BUFFETT: Yeah. Well, I would say I don't think there's going to be an upcoming debt crisis, but if you believe that fiscal activities that the government will get out of control and that we will get on a situation where the debt skyrockets, you will have, obviously, you'll have inflation--significant inflation. No government likes to pay back its debt in dollars that are equivalent to the kind they took in. The best thing you're going to have is develop your own talent. I mean, if you're the best doctor in town, if you're the best teacher in town, if you're, you know, the best salesman in town, you'll do well no matter what the currency does.
QUICK: Mm-hmm.
BUFFETT: I mean, you will get your share. So investing in yourself is always the best thing. Now, second best thing is to own products or stocks that have products that don't require much capital investment, because you don't want to be--have a lot of required capital investment during inflation; where they have very little capital investment but they are sort of a royalty on whatever the current price level is in the country. I mean, if you take--I don't know what product you might buy regularly, but what--whatever you use for your hair or...
QUICK: (Unintelligible)
BUFFETT: You're not going to change that if the price level doubles.
QUICK: Right.
BUFFETT: And if they don't have to build new plants or anything, they just ride along that curve.
QUICK: OK. And very quickly, that Irvine, California, question, I think we heard the wrong one. The Irvine question, another one he was just asking about was what's going to happen with Fannie Mae? Are they going under?
BUFFETT: Well, in a sense they've gone under in that--in that they only are existing because the federal government has said that they're going to back up their obligations, so that...
QUICK: Right.
BUFFETT: ...from a standpoint of an independent entity, it--it's--the game is over on that, pretty much. And that does not mean the Fannie debt or the guarantee on Fannie mortgages is bad. Fannie Mae's an important institution in the--in the United States. But they priced risk wrong.
QUICK: Mm-hmm.
BUFFETT: They did some things in accounting that were bad, they tried to obtain goals that couldn't be achieved, and in the--and they leveraged up to an extent that was kind of crazy and certainly was crazy to do it with the assets that they were using the leverage for. So essentially the equity got wiped out.
QUICK: OK. We're going to take a quick break right now, but folks, when we come back we're going to talk about Warren and Bill's excellent adventure. We'll get the inside story of your summer expedition with Bill Gates. You just went this week to look at the tar sands.
BUFFETT: True.
QUICK: All right. We're going to talk about all of that when we come up, and we'll be checking in with questions from more viewers across the country, too.
Unidentified Man #3: I was very curious, in your recent 10-Q, that you had not purchased any bank stocks, very surprised that you had not jumped on that in July. I was wondering how low they have to go before you're interested.
CONTINUED: BUFFETT'S TRIP TO THE CANADIAN OIL SANDS
Announcer: This is a special edition of SQUAWK BOX live from the Holland Performing Arts Center in the heart of beautiful Omaha, Nebraska. Now, once again, here's Warren Buffett and Becky Quick.
QUICK: Welcome back, everybody, to this special edition of SQUAWK BOX. We've been talking all morning long with Warren Buffett of Omaha, Nebraska, since we're live in Omaha today. And, Warren, we've covered a range of topics, but there has been an awful lot of people who are interested in the trip you made this week. On Monday you headed up with Bill Gates and you got to take a look at the tar sands. What happened?
BUFFETT: Well, what happened was Bill and I talked some months ago about just how interesting the whole thing was from a geology standpoint and from the standpoint that that represents one of the few big upcoming sources of more oil production in the world, or very few. And we both thought we'd understand a little bit better if we went up and looked at it than simply by reading about it. So on Monday six of us, Bill and a few other fellows--the Kiewit company arranged it. They're--they've done a lot of construction up there. And we went up to northern Alberta and we saw a very big mining-type project. There are two ways that they recover oil from the tar sands. And then we went to this in situ project also, and we had some perfect people explain a lot about how it worked both from a economic standpoint and from a physical standpoint.
QUICK: Uh-huh. And was this something that you came up with, that Bill came up with, your friend, Walter Scott, from the Kiewit company? Who came up with the idea?
BUFFETT: Well, Walter Scott arranged it for us.
QUICK: Right.
BUFFETT: Walter's a whole lot smarter than I am about what goes on in mining and all of--anything to do with the real world. I'm good with numbers. And so he arranged the trip for us. But it was something that Bill and I cooked up by--a couple of months ago when we were talking about the tar sands. We said why don't we go up and take a look? And so we found a date when six of us could do it. Walter arranged the trip. We had some wonderful people up there in Alberta at both projects that explained how the things really work, the costs involved. And they just couldn't have been more helpful.
QUICK: OK. So having seen that, there's already been a lot of people who've been speculating that you must be interested in investing in this arena. Are you?
BUFFETT: No, no. I go to the movies, but I don't buy movie companies. I mean, I--I'm always interested in understanding the math of things and understanding as much as I can about all aspects of business. And what I learn today may be useful to me two years from now. I mean, if I understand the tar stands today and oil prices change or whatever may happen, I'm--I've got that filed away and I can--I can use it at some later date. And that's really the wonderful thing about investments is your knowledge is cumulative. So if you learn about coal or you learn about retailing or something, 40 years you--it's useful at some point.
QUICK: Wait, does that make you think that an investment in a tar sands company, somebody who's making--taking advantage of that would not be worth it at $120 a barrel for oil?
BUFFETT: Well, the biggest variable in whether it's a good investment is the price of oil. Now, it's important to know how much they can get out and what their costs are going to be and what the capital costs--all of that is important and that fits into it. But you still have to figure out what your own feeling is about what oil's going to be selling for three years from now or five years from now. Because you could be the world's greatest mining engineer, but if you were wrong about the price of oil in a big way it would negate all that knowledge. So it--I can tell you that if 100--if you had $120 oil from now till, you know, 50 years from now, that the tar sands would be--would work out very well. But I don't know the answer to that. And I may form an opinion at some point, and I've got it--I'm prepared to form that opinion now.
QUICK: But you are not actively looking right now to invest in any of these companies?
BUFFETT: Do I have a buy order this morning? The answer's no.
QUICK: OK. Warren, we have a lot more to get to with you this morning. When we return, we're going to be speaking more with Warren Buffett. Again, this is a big day. We've still got two hours left and we've still got two big stories coming up. Again, I'm here live with Warren Buffett in Omaha. We're also going to be covering everything that's happening with the Olympics. Carl is standing by live in Beijing. This is day 13 of the Olympics, coming to an end. We'll have more SQUAWK in two minutes.
THIS IS PART THREE OF "THREE HOURS WITH WARREN BUFFETT - LIVE FROM OMAHA" ON CNBC'S SQUAWK BOX WITH BECKY QUICK, FRIDAY, AUGUST 22, 2008.
CARL QUINTANILLA, co-anchor (Beijing): But first we're going to start with the man of the hour, Beck--actually, he's the man of three hours--Warren Buffett with you in Omaha.
BECKY QUICK, co-anchor (Omaha, Nebraska): That's right, Carl. We are live in Omaha today because last night there was a groundbreaking event in the world of finance and politics and it took place right here. This was the world premiere of a documentary that's called "I.O.U.S.A." This film takes a look at what it thinks are America's four key deficits and it explores into all the risks of these deficits, what it means to the future of this country and its citizens. Now, Warren, you were in the documentary last night right along with Robert Rubin, with Paul Volcker and with Alan Greenspan. So let's take a quick look at a brief clip from the film last night.
(Clip from "I.O.U.S.A.")
QUICK: OK. Again, that was a clip with Alan Greenspan from the movie last night. It premiered on hundreds of movie screens across the country last night, including right here in Omaha. After the debut, I got the chance to moderate a town hall meeting with the men who were behind the movie, Blackstone's Pete Peterson and the former US Comptroller General David Walker. This is a quick look from that. And Warren, we did have a big discussion last night about what the big problems are and exactly where things are going at this moment. In your--in your view, we just heard from Alan Greenspan, he said that you need to be looking at what's happening down the road. What do you think about that?
WARREN BUFFETT (Berkshire Hathaway Chairman & CEO): Well, I think in any personal activity, business activity or certainly governmental activity, you know, there should be--you should be thinking plenty about what happens down the road. That's one of the jobs of government is to think about what is going to be our energy situation if we don't change 20 or 30 years from now.
QUICK: Mm-hmm.
BUFFETT: What's going to be the fiscal situation. And so unfortunately, you have a many--the most important things in society, the policy cycle is longer than the electoral cycle.
QUICK: Mm-hmm.
BUFFETT: So it's very tough to elect people every two years and ask them to be thinking about something 20 years down the road.
QUICK: OK. We're going to talking more about this film in just a little bit. David Walker will be joining us again, Pete Peterson, to talk about some of these issues. We also, though, have you here for a lot of things that are happening right now in the economy. And at the top of the last hour you talked about where you think the economy is headed. You still think that the trouble in the economy, it could get much deeper from here?
BUFFETT: Well, I think you're seeing the ripples go out from what's started as a crisis in home lending and the fact that we had a--we had a housing boom fueled by a lot of lending by people who didn't know what they were lending on. And that's caused enormous problems in the financial markets as people have started looking at these instruments which they thought were triple-A and they're finding out they're about triple-F and--but those problem--problems have a way of spreading, and that caused the banks to start want--starting to want to start deleveraging in a big way. And when banks start deleveraging, that has--sends ripples out. So there's consequences to every pebble that's dropped in the ocean and we had a pretty big pebble dropped in.
QUICK: Now, you--your view of the economy comes not only from your own holdings, all the companies that you own outright--everything from GEICO to Dairy Queen to Gen Re to Acme Brick Company, all the companies that you hold--but also the holdings that you have in other big companies, correct?
BUFFETT: Right.
QUICK: What sort of insight does that give you?
BUFFETT: Well, it--obviously, I pay a lot of attention to what's happening. And we'll say at American Express--and Ken Chenault talked about that here a month ago--but they are experiencing credit deterioration and they're experiencing it sort of in all segments. So they're seeing the rich customers slow down in payments, slow down in purchases. And American Express can describe that rather than I, but I pay a lot of attention to that sort of thing. And incidentally, it will get cured at some time in the future, but right now the situation is getting worse and I would say I don't see any early end to that.
QUICK: We want to talk to you about...
BUFFETT: But I do see an end.
QUICK: You do see an end, but no early end. I mean, is that six months, is that 12 months, is that 18 months?
BUFFETT: I don't know.
QUICK: Can you put a time?
BUFFETT: Yeah, I don't know the answer to that. All I know is that it's not--I don't think it's going to be really soon. I think that--my candidate is Obama, so I think President Obama is going to have plenty on his plate in January.
QUICK: OK. Let's talk about your most recent disclosures for some of your holdings. When we saw the last numbers, your shares in Anheuser-Busch, a lot of people were surprised to see that you had gotten out of those shares before a deal went through with InBev.
BUFFETT: That's right. I sold about 60 percent of them in the second quarter.
QUICK: Why?
BUFFETT: Well, I wasn't--it was an evaluation of whether I thought the deal would go through and the desire to sell at least some of the shares. I mean, Anheuser-Busch did not want the deal to go through and they hired investment bankers, very expensive. They spent $72 million with two investment banking firms. And believe me, most of that was spent with the idea of trying to keep InBev away. So who knew how it was going to come out? And InBev persevered, they raised their price and on the remaining shares we'll do somewhat better; although there's still a time factor and we've used the money for other things. But in retrospect, I was wrong to decide to partially sell the holdings.
QUICK: What...
BUFFETT: But that--that's not news. I'm often wrong.
QUICK: What price did you sell at? It did not say in the filings.
BUFFETT: Oh, I--we probably averaged around 61 or 2, something like that.
QUICK: OK, 61 or 62, you still had a third. Are you--do you still hold that position?
BUFFETT: Yeah. We--yeah. We hold the shares, yeah. You didn't ask me that last time, so yeah.
QUICK: I know, I didn't. I had to circle back this time a lot. So you still have those shares. One of the other things from that filing that Berkshire filed with the SEC noted that you weren't talking at that point about what's going on with ConocoPhillips.
BUFFETT: That's right.
QUICK: OK. Well, we have you here right now. That means a lot of people are out there assuming that you're either buying or selling shares of Conoco and...
BUFFETT: That's certainly correct.
QUICK: And if I was a betting man, would it be right to think that maybe you were selling and taking profits based on where oil prices have gone?
BUFFETT: Well, if you were a betting man, you'd be betting.
QUICK: Oh, so you're not going to necessarily come out there on that. Let's talk about the price of oil in general.
BUFFETT: Sure.
QUICK: Price of oil has gone rapidly higher in the last few days. Once again, about 120, still down from where it was...
BUFFETT: Mm-hmm.
QUICK: ...just a month ago. But 120, you think that that's a comfortable price for oil?
BUFFETT: It's very hard to tell, but what you do know is that the situation in respect to supply and demand in oil has changed dramatically in the last five or six years from what has existed ever since World War II. I mean, ever since World War II we've always had a significant amount of producible capacity beyond the demand that existed. Now, maybe for one reason or another it wasn't being produced. The Texas Railroad Commission used to--which was kind of--kind of a domestic OPEC--used to shut down the wells in Texas because there was so much producing capacity and they didn't want to knock down the price, which was $3 a barrel then. So we've always had the situation post World War II where it's been a lot more supply could come on than there was demand. In the last 10 years, the first five years oil demand went up around four million barrels a day, and then in the next five years it went up another eight million barrels a day. That's 12 million barrels a day. We did not bring on, in the world, anything like that in terms of productive capacity. So at 86 million barrels a day, which is the present demand, roughly...
QUICK: Mm-hmm.
BUFFETT: ...the world that has no real buffer stock in terms of the--you can't turn the tap on and get 90 or 95. And that means that prices have been and will be quite volatile and probably--well, they have been at a--certainly at a higher level. It is a different world in terms of supply and demand on oil than existed five years ago.
QUICK: What's your thought as to what the nation needs to be doing right now? I know you've spoken with Boone Pickens about his plan.
BUFFETT: Yeah. Well, Boone's on the right track. And then one way or another, you know, we're using 20 million barrels or so a day of oil, we're using a quarter of the oil, roughly, in the world. We and the world cannot certainly keep increasing our demand for oil. If we--if we required another 10 million or 12 million barrels a day in the next 10 years, I'm not sure where it would come from or at what price it would come from. We just don't have that. The tar sands would actually--will increase some, but oil depletes, production of oil depletes.
QUICK: Hm.
BUFFETT: And so one way or another, we're going to have to learn to use a lot less oil. And my guess is we're using less oil right now in the United States because of price factors.
QUICK: Yes.
BUFFETT: But I'm not sure that the world demand is--maybe it's decreased a million barrels a day or something like that, but that isn't going to do it over 10 years. We're going to have to use less oil.
QUICK: OK, Warren, we're going to be checking in with you again after we come back. We'll have more from Omaha, folks. But we're also going to be checking in with Carl. He's got plenty more coming up in Beijing. Carl:
QUINTANILLA: Becky, if Warren breaks any more news we're going to have to just go off the air here, our heads are going to explode for all he information that's coming from him.
CONTINUED: IS AMERICA GOING BROKE?
BUFFETT: (From town hall meeting) Every line in the tax code is important to some constituency. I'm not sure every line in the Bible is, though. The--and actually, you know, you've got thousands of lobbyists there protecting each line in the tax code and I'm--again, I'm not sure about whether the Bible has an equal army of people in--on K Street.
QUICK: All right, that was Warren Buffett answering a question on taxes during our town hall right here in Omaha last night. Again, this was a town hall that was celebrating and looking into the opening of "I.O.U.S.A.," that's a new documentary that opened and premiered last night in theaters across the country. That question that came was from someone who wrote in asking why the tax code is longer than the Bible. Well, it's something we got to talk about with plenty of our participants last night. In fact, we're joined right now by some of the other participants in that conversation. Pete Peterson is here with us this morning. Also David Walker and Bill Novelli, the CEO of the AARP. And gentlemen, thank you for being here once again this morning on the same stage where we were last night. I'm guessing everybody is working on adrenaline at this point, practically all-nighters for everybody involved. Pete, let's start out with you. The movie last night, "I.O.U.S.A.," is something that the Peter G. Peter--Peter G. Peterson Foundation did put some financial backing into. Why did you get interested in it? What's important that you think in the message?
PETE PETERSON (Peter G. Peterson Foundation): Well, Dave and I have concluded unanimously, the two of us, that the country faces some long-term challenges that if we don't address them are undeniable, at least in our opinion, unsustainable, and yet they're, politically speaking, not touchable.
QUICK: Mm-hmm.
Dave Grogan / CNBC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PETERSON: And our job, we think, in a democracy like ours is to use every means we can, and this film is only part of a much broader program to educate the American public and to activate them and motivate them to do something about it. And the doing something about it is essentially to let our elected representatives know that this is serious and they want action. At the present time they feel--that is, our representatives feel that if they confront some of these long-term problems, since all of them involve somebody either giving up something or paying more for something, that it will result--not only being politically incorrect, but politically terminal.
QUICK: Mm-hmm.
PETERSON: And we've got to change that around so that they feel that if they don't do anything, then they're going to be in re-election trouble.
QUICK: David Walker, we spoke with you earlier this morning. Again, David Walker who's the former comptroller general of the United States. If you have to look and put your finger on one issue that you think is the most pressing thing, what is it?
DAVID WALKER (Peter G. Peterson Foundation): Health care costs are totally out of control. Health care costs represent 34 trillion, just Medicare alone, 34 trillion of our $53 trillion hole. The United States is the only country on the face of the earth that's dumb enough not to have a budget for health care. Every other country does. We need to engage in fundamental reform of health care to achieve universal coverage for basic and essential health care, have a budget for health care. We need universal practice standards, evidence-based practice standards, and we need to enhance personal responsibility and accountability.
QUICK: All right. Bill, you represent the AARP, and some people have said in the past that seniors get very concerned when you start taking away benefits or changing things that have been set up. What are--what does your constituency think about the plan presented here?
WILLIAM NOVELLI (AARP CEO): Well, we've done a tremendous amount of research among our 40 million members and the rest of the public down to 18 years old, and we're pretty sure that the public is ahead of the politicians. People do want change. The generations in this country are very closely connected to each other and they have one thing in common, they want this country to be strong for the future, for their children and their grandchildren. And so what we have here is a big opportunity. This video that has been done here is a good kind of wake-up call, and from an AARP standpoint we can do town hall meetings across the country, thousands of them. So this is an opportunity to make change.
QUICK: Warren, you're not convinced that things are quite as dire.
BUFFETT: No, I--the short-term outlook is not. But we've had a number of recessions in this country; in fact, we had a Great Depression, we had--we've got world wars. And throughout, the genius of the American economy, our emphasis on a meritocracy and a market system and a rule of law has enabled generation after generation to live better than their parents did. And, I mean, most of the people in this room, practically all of them last night, lived better than John D. Rockefeller lived. I mean, all kinds of things have happened. And in the 20th century alone, the standard of living of the average American went up seven for one. There's never been a period like it in history. And that's not an accident. It's because we unleash human potential and will continue to do that in the future. And we'll always have challenges and we'll always have disputes between different demographic groups and income groups. The rich don't want to pay their share of the taxes. The poor probably, you know, they--in the last 20 years, the net worth of the Forbes 400 has gone from 220 billion to a trillion five hundred and forty billion. So you'll always have fights within the family about who gets what of the pie, but the pie will grow.
QUICK: But there are points that all four of you agree on. What's the closest point where, I mean, you say, `Yes, this is something the American people need to hear?'
BUFFETT: Well, I think you should always be thinking about the future. I mean, I think you're crazy if you're not--if you're not planning out where you'll be in 10 and 20 or 30 years. You'll get surprises in those plans.
QUICK: Mm-hmm.
BUFFETT: And frankly, American ingenuity will tend to surprise on the upside much of the time. I also think that it's dangerous politically over time. It doesn't endanger the economy in a huge way, but it's dangerous politically over time to run very large current account deficits whereby there's a massive transfer of assets or IOUs to the rest of the world from America. I think that will cause a lot of demagoguery and potentially some real problems 20 years down the road. We'd still have a more prosperous society.
QUICK: Mm-hmm.
BUFFETT: But it wouldn't be--wouldn't be as good as if we didn't do it.
QUICK: David?
WALKER: I think we agree on two things. I believe all four of us do, based on listening last night and talking this morning. Number one, we need to focus on the future.
QUICK: Hm.
WALKER: We're a great country, we need to do a number of things to make sure we stay great. And secondly, we support a capable, credible and bipartisan commission to be able to make recommendations to the next president and the next Congress to deal with some of these challenges so we can start making a down payment on our big hole and try to increase the likelihood that our future will be better than our past.
QUICK: You've had conversations with both campaigns, with the McCain and the Obama campaigns. What's been your takeaway from those conversations?
WALKER: Well, the takeaway is there's a difference between getting elected and governing, and there's a tendency for people not to want to talk with too much specificity with regard to some of these challenges in order to get elected.
QUICK: Mm-hmm. Right.
WALKER: The challenge is this: If they don't at least acknowledge the problem and figure a--figure a path for it, like a commission, then you don't have a mandate to be able to do something after you're elected. And so that's why I think acknowledging the problem, endorsing a capable, credible and bipartisan commission is the right thing to do for them and the right thing for the country.
QUICK: Mr. Peterson, you put some financing into this film. Would you consider doing a debate with the two political candidates that focuses specifically on the economic issues out there?
PETERSON: I'm just the aging founder of this. We have the CEO sitting here. We're exploring all kinds of possibilities.
BUFFETT: The one thing you won't find, Becky, you won't--you won't find either candidate telling you that if we're going to spend $3.1 trillion next year, the federal government will tell you how they're going to raise 3.1 trillion. They just aren't going to come up with it. They...
QUICK: Long on promises, short on ways on how to do it right now.
WALKER: Maybe if you invited them, they'd come. But they would have some trepidation, I think. And I think we'd find some ways to come up with some funding for it if it was necessary.
QUICK: But...
PETERSON: The other big audience that we're going to focus on are the young people. And I'm one of these old fogies that doesn't even do e-mail, so I'm hardly the person to plan it. But we've got a bunch of young people who are experts looking at Facebook and MySpace and MTV and so forth, because it's going to be very important to get these young people aware of their future, incidentally, not mine. Buffett and I'll do pretty well, if we don't live...
BUFFETT: I hope so.
PETERSON: If we don't live too long.
BUFFETT: Yeah.
QUICK: David, if you had, again, to take a look and go out to Congress, do you think this is a message that plays back? You're in an election season, it's a tricky time. But what's been the push back? What's been the...
WALKER: Well, I agree with what Bill Novelli said.
QUICK: Mm-hmm.
WALKER: I mean, the American people are ahead of the politicians.
QUICK: Hm.
WALKER: They're not accustomed to hearing the truth from the politicians and they're looking for two things. They want truth and they want leadership.
QUICK: Mm-hmm.
WALKER: And they need--we need more of both right now. So I think that if we can get the American people engaged, involved, if we can get the presidential candidates to acknowledge the problem, to be able to endorse the type of commission we're talking about as a way forward, there's hope.
QUICK: OK.
NOVELLI: Becky, you got a question last night from a woman who said, `I'm a boomer and I'm worried about my adult daughter.'
QUICK: Yeah. Mm-hmm.
NOVELLI: This is true all over the country. You know, the majority of adults in this country think that their children are going to be worse off than they were. This would be the American dream going backwards. We can't let this happen.
QUICK: All right, gentlemen, I want to thank you all for joining us this morning. It's a topic we'll be discussing through this morning as well. But also coming up, this is something you've never heard Warren Buffett talk about ever before. We're going to be back in two minutes. I'm as intrigued as you are.
BUFFETT: (Unintelligible)
QUICK: So is he, you should see his face. We're going to be spending the morning with the world's most famous investor and we have much more SQUAWK right after this.
THIS IS PART FOUR OF "THREE HOURS WITH WARREN BUFFETT - LIVE FROM OMAHA" ON CNBC'S SQUAWK BOX WITH BECKY QUICK, FRIDAY, AUGUST 22, 2008.
BECKY QUICK, co-anchor (Omaha, Nebraska): Coming up, we will have much more from the "Oracle of Omaha." He has lots of wisdom to share with all of us. In fact, just listen to this.
WARREN BUFFETT ON TAPE FROM LAST NIGHT: It has not paid to sell America short since 1776, and the time to start is not 2008.
(Announcements)
QUICK: All right. Welcome back, everyone, to this special edition of SQUAWK BOX. We are live in Omaha, Nebraska, and we are fortunate enough to be joined this morning with Warren Buffett. He's got to be the world's most celebrated investor. Warren, we want to thank you for joining us here this morning.
BUFFETT: I'm enjoying it.
QUICK: Well, we have a lot to talk about. If you take a look at what's been happening with the Federal Reserve, with the challenges they've been facing, what kind of job, what kind of ratings would you give the Federal Reserve up to this point?
BUFFETT: Well, I--I'm inclined to give anybody that takes on a tough job like that a pretty good rating. I mean, they get the toughest problems of the world thrown at them. And in my job, I wait for easy pitches. I mean, I--you know, somebody can say Microsoft at 27 or General Motors at 10 and I don't have to swing. I--there's no called strike in my business. So I wait--I could wait a year and get one pitch I like and swing. And so I wait for the easy ones. And in the Federal Reserve position, you have to take on the toughest problems. There are no obvious answers, there's trade-offs. And when I--when somebody that's very bright, very public-spirited takes on the job, I'm disinclined to ever criticize.
QUICK: Do you think the Federal Reserve has gotten inflation under control? Do you think that they've focused a fair amount on the economy?
BUFFETT: No, they've got a tough problem. I mean, with these dual goals of essentially stimulating growth and at the same time containing inflation, they're in direct conflict. And the temptation is, since the lack of growth is apparent today and the inflation tends to kick in later on, to ignore the inflation aspects. It's a very tough balancing act and it can't be done perfectly. And like I say, I couldn't do it perfectly and I don't think anybody can, but I admire the people that take on the job. I admire Bernanke, I admire Greenspan. That doesn't mean I think they were always right. It's--I think they're thought to have more power than they really do have. I mean, Ben Bernanke does not have any magic wand that's going to create--enable people that have borrowed too much money on their homes or people who've lent unwisely or the banks that are too leveraged, that doesn't go away easily.
QUICK: We talked earlier this morning about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and some of the major problems facing those two institutions right now. In your opinion do these stocks, you think, get wiped out?
Dave Grogan / CNBC
BUFFETT: Well, there's certainly a reasonable chance of that because they wrote insurance at the wrong price. And if you write insurance and write--we write insurance at the wrong price, you know, we're going to go broke. I mean, it--when you write insurance, you make a promise. In their case, they guaranteed the credit of trillions of dollars worth of mortgages and they charged a service fee for doing it--an insurance premium you can call it--and they got the wrong price for it. And then they--their other activity, which is to run a very large sort of hedge fund with a carry, where they lend money long and they borrow money in various ways, they had a spread on that. And that works fine as long as the spread's maintained and they've done some things to protect that, but it doesn't do well if the assets crumble on them, and they've had some crumbling. So they got into trouble the way people have historically got into trouble both in terms of running a carry trade and both in--and in terms of writing insurance at the wrong prices. And there is no easy cure. You can't tear up your old insurance contracts. And they can--they keep existing because they've got the federal government behind them. And the federal government should be behind them, excluding the equity portion.
QUICK: You own shares of Fannie Mae, Berkshire Hathaway did, up until when, about 2001?
BUFFETT: We were the largest shareholders of Freddie Mac in the--in the United States, and around 2000 or 2001...
QUICK: Yeah.
BUFFETT: ...it became so apparent to me that they were intent on trying to report quarterly gains to please Wall Street, and there are all--if you've got the government behind you and you can borrow money in unlimited amounts, you can report earnings for any given quarter that you want to. I mean, the chickens don't come home to roost till later. And the management was intent on that. They started doing things on the asset side they shouldn't have done, they made promises they shouldn't have made, and so we got out.
QUICK: All right. If--is there anything that would ever convince to you get back in, or would these companies have to be completely recapitalized and reset up?
BUFFETT: It would--it would--it would take a much different situation.
QUICK: (Unintelligible)
BUFFETT: You need--if you run an institution with enormous leverage, you need somebody with a fiduciary gene running it. And they had a peculiar problem in that they were trying to serve two masters. And then Congress was telling them push the money out and foster housing in every way you can, don't require as much in down payments, make--you know, all kinds of things, take on projects that they wouldn't have taken on for an economic reason. And Wall Street was saying deliver us 15 percent earnings gains every quarter. And they tried to do both of those things, and in the end they're going to do neither.
QUICK: When you take a look at the United States and its stock market compared to what you see overseas right now, where--what makes you most excited when...
BUFFETT: Well, I see values in all arenas. I mean, we try to look for the best ones, but there's no magic to any given market and things are cheaper than they were a year ago in markets here and in markets around the world. So everything is more attractive, generally speaking, both here and in Germany and the UK and Korea and you name it. And I just try to look for the things I understand the best and that also are selling for less than I think they're worth.
QUICK: The dollar has gotten much stronger over the last month.
BUFFETT: Right.
QUICK: Is that a trend that you think can or will continue?
BUFFETT: Well, it won't continue if over the next five or 10 years we run very large current account deficits. Now, exports have been doing well lately. I mean, the country is remarkably innovative and resilient. I mean, we are going to export 12 percent of our GDP this year, and in 1970 it was 5 percent.
QUICK: Mm-hmm.
BUFFETT: So people who think that America is not in the game are totally wrong. But we have been importing like 17 percent of GDP. If we have that gap and it continues, the dollar over time will get weaker. Not necessarily next week or next month or next year, but it will get weaker over time. You can't run persistent, huge current account deficits for decades and not have consequences.
QUICK: But you don't have any bets against the dollar right now.
BUFFETT: Not right now.
QUICK: You've taken them in the past. At the moment, nothing?
BUFFETT: That's right.
QUICK: You have any currency plays right now?
BUFFETT: None--no direct currency play. We own stocks in companies in other countries, but no currency plays.
QUICK: OK, let's take a couple questions from people that we were listening from last night. Again, we've been spending the morning with you, but last night we did have CNBC crews who went out to some of the theaters across the country that were previewing "I.O.U.S.A." We got a chance to catch up with some of the people there and ask them a few questions. Let's start out with one question that's coming from Chicago.
Unidentified Woman: Hi, Warren. Identifying the debt problem and coming up with a solution seems like an easier task than motivating Congress. What would you suggest that we do to help motivate a shortsighted Congress?
QUICK: OK. That's, again, going back to how do you motivate a shortsighted congress. What would you suggest?
BUFFETT: It's very tough. I mean, in the end, can I name a politician in the last 20 years that said, `My campaign is I'm going to increase your taxes a lot and come close to closing the budget deficit.' And since nobody wants spending cut--they all want the other guy's spending cut...
QUICK: Mm-hmm.
BUFFETT: ...and, you know, we'll have to increase taxes. I--Walter Mondale tried it in 1984 without much success. Now, what I do with politicians is I ask them what they believe in and will work for that a majority of their constituents oppose. Now, if they give me an answer to that, I know they really believe that. I mean, I don't get long answers to that question. But what they...
QUICK: I bet you don't.
BUFFETT: Yeah, no. But that's the real test of what they believe in. Anybody's for anything that gets them elected, so if they--if they say, `I'm for lowering your taxes,' or `I'm for bringing all kinds of things to my district,' or `earmarking things,' you know, of course they're going to say that. And they'll say that whether they believe in it or not because it keeps their jobs. Now, the question is what do they believe in that might endanger their job if in--if done?
QUICK: What did Barack Obama say when you asked him that question? You're supporting him.
BUFFETT: Yeah. I'm not going to ask him that question.
QUICK: You haven't asked him that question.
BUFFETT: No, I didn't--I didn't--I didn't put that one to him.
QUICK: Why not?
BUFFETT: I didn't feel like putting him on the spot that way.
QUICK: But he got your support anyways.
BUFFETT: Well, I have a choice of two candidates...
QUICK: Right.
BUFFETT: ...and I support Barack and I think that on balance he will be better for America. Although I admire John McCain as an individual, but I think that Barack would be better. But I will--I can tell you that both candidates are not addressing things in the campaign that are important issues, because they feel it'll cost them votes.
QUICK: What do you think is the most important issue that's not being addressed by either campaign?
BUFFETT: Well, I think in the--certainly in the financial area. Now, they've both made certain proposals on taxes, but in terms of the realism of what would happen in terms of closing budget deficits or something of the sort, I don't think they really want to get that specific about it now.
QUICK: OK. I think we're going to have more on this conversation--a little bit more about what's happening in the election, what you think about the ideas of a windfall profits tax, and we'll talk about all of those issues in just a little bit coming up. Meantime, though, we're going to take a very quick break and let you catch your breath. You can have a sip of your Cherry Coke. You, too. Anyway, folks, we'll be right back with much more from Warren Buffett on his home turf right here in Omaha, Nebraska.
CONTINUED: WHO WILL BE BUFFETT'S CATCHER AT FENWAY?
QUICK: Warren, you couldn't hear what Steve had just been talking about, but he did say that one point coming out of Jackson Hole is that this rise we've seen again in the dollar--rise that we've seen again in oil is clear evidence that the Fed does not have everything under control when it comes to inflation. What do you think about that?
BUFFETT: Well, the Fed doesn't have--but even without that fact, I mean, the Fed's got real problems with inflation and have got it in commodity prices. I--every business we have, but some of them in a dramatic way, are getting cost increases thrown at us. I just was looking at the reports for July on certain businesses, and we're trying to push through price increases ourselves. And our margins are getting squeezed in certain major businesses simply because we don't get price increases as fast as we're getting them. But we're pushing up prices.
QUICK: So you see it going right through? Which...
BUFFETT: Sure it's going to go through.
QUICK: Which businesses are the toughest to get them through?
BUFFETT: Well, it's tough, and we're in various things connected with residential housing.
QUICK: Right.
BUFFETT: Take carpet, for example...
QUICK: Right.
BUFFETT: ...or insulation. These things all have a huge energy base to them. I mean, carpet is oil, and weekly we get these price increases thrown at us and they're usually effective immediately, whereas we have trouble with our retailers getting them to say, well, 30 days from now or 60 days from now. And we don't want to--we don't like telling a retailer that you can have your price increase tomorrow. So there have been increase after increase in prices and our margins are still going down, and that's happening--if you take brick, that's natural gas. I mean, there's all kinds of areas where it's happening. Food it's just--it's pouring through.
QUICK: But does that mean you were not surprised by that very hot PPI number that we just...
BUFFETT: No, I wasn't surprised at all.
QUICK: You weren't.
BUFFETT: No. I--in fact, if anything I feel that the CPI has been sort of understating what's been going on. We are in an--we are in a economy that is going to see significant--and is seeing significant inflation. The only--the only people who aren't getting much inflation are blue-collar workers and the middle class in terms of their income. So they are getting squeezed like crazy.
QUICK: Would it--does that mean you expect to see more PPI increases and eventually see that showing up in the CPI as well?
BUFFETT: It has to, but--yeah. They--the cost of living is going up and, you know, unfortunately, the prices of houses going down and there's--there are problems in the economy. We will get through this. But as Paul Volcker mentioned in the movie last night, the problem with inflation is if it gets ignited, it gets very hard to put at a--at a--at a point. I mean, Paul Volcker had to go in with a 2x4 to the economy in the early '80s and we had inflationary expectations built in to a terrific degree.
QUICK: Mm-hmm.
BUFFETT: And if that happens again, we've got lots of troubles.
QUICK: Warren, we teased earlier that we were going to mention something nobody had heard about just yet. We know that you're a huge baseball fan, but you also have a big day coming up. What is that big day?
BUFFETT: It's a--it's a huge day for all of baseball, actually. On September 9th in Fenway Park I will be starting. And--but more important than that--because I've thrown out the first pitch other times--but this time I brought my secret weapon.
QUICK: Which is?
BUFFETT: Jack Welch is going to be my catcher.
QUICK: Jack Welch is your catcher.
BUFFETT: Yeah. I mean, can you imagine being able to pitch with Jack calling the pitches? And, I mean, anything he calls for. I've got--I've got a fastball, a curve, a sinker, you know, a spitball, a knuckleball, a sidearm delivery. And if Jack calls for any pitch, including the ball that bounces four or five times before it gets to the plate, I'm going to throw it.
QUICK: You're going to throw exactly what he calls for.
BUFFETT: So if I--if that's the pitch, it's because Jack called it.
QUICK: All right, we'll all be watching that. That's coming up, again, you said September 9th.
BUFFETT: September 9th, right.
QUICK: OK. Folks, we still have a lot more to come this morning. You have not heard the last from Warren Buffett yet. We'll get much more on his holdings, what he's thinking about buying and selling, maybe. We'll also talk to him about the economy. We'll get to the election and much, much more. Plus, don't forget, Carl is live in Beijing as day 13 of the Olympics comes to an end. We are going for the gold this morning. This is a special split edition of SQUAWK BOX live from America's heartland and from China. It's all coming up when we come right back.
THIS IS PART FIVE OF "THREE HOURS WITH WARREN BUFFETT - LIVE FROM OMAHA" ON CNBC'S SQUAWK BOX WITH BECKY QUICK, FRIDAY, AUGUST 22, 2008.
Announcer: This is a special edition of SQUAWK BOX, live from the Holland Performing Arts Center in the heart of beautiful Omaha, Nebraska. Billionaire investor Warren Buffett in his hometown talking markets.
WARREN BUFFETT: It's a different world in terms of supply and demand on oil than existed five years ago.
Announcer: The economy.
BUFFETT: It's not over by a longshot.
Announcer: And everything in between.
BUFFETT: Coca-Cola would never be going on a country road when the Interstate's available.
Announcer: Only with us. SQUAWK BOX begins right now.
BECKY QUICK, co-anchor (Omaha, Nebraska): Good morning, everybody. Welcome back to SQUAWK BOX right here on CNBC. As you know we have quite a show in store for you today. Our special guest, who's been with us for two hours already, is a man who needs no introduction. We're talking about Warren Buffett. And, Warren, thank you again for hosting us in your hometown. It's great to be here with you in Omaha.
BUFFETT: Thank you.
(Carl Quintanilla airs from the Olympics)
(Clips from "I.O.U.S.A.")
QUICK: All right. Warren, let's get back to the state of the economy right here and around the globe. When you look around, what do you worry about most when it comes to the economy?
BUFFETT: Well, I don't worry that much in the sense that we've been through lots of recessions in the past, and that the country always comes out stronger, and so I expect--I expect stock markets to go down from time to time. I expect there to be uncovered--I expect that we will uncover credit mistakes. I expect that we'll have recessions. But I also expect, and I'm totally convinced, that your children will live better than you and your grandchildren will live better. So I don't--I don't get upset about, day-to-day, what's happening in the market. It may offer--in fact, it does offer chances to buy things more attractively. I mean, if I go to a supermarket and things are on sale, I feel better.
QUICK: All right. So let's talk about that. Are there bargains out there right now?
BUFFETT: Well, there are certainly things that are a lot cheaper than they were a few years ago, and the businesses are better. Now, that doesn't mean they're doing better today, but they are fundamentally worth more money than they were a couple of years ago, and people are just looking at the glass being half empty rather than half full now.
QUICK: When we talked to you a few months ago, you talked about how you get a lot of phone calls, people call you up with deals. How many phone calls are you getting now? Would you say it's more or fewer than you got three months ago?
BUFFETT: It's probably a little more, but I was getting calls then, too. But I don't get loads of calls, but they sometimes are talking about fairly good-sized deals, and we get the calls from the people that have run out of money. Those are not--some guy calls me up and says, `I just lost $5 billion and will you replenish it,' I don't get quite as excited about that as if somebody's got a good idea and is making money with it. But there have been more calls that have been sort of distress-type calls than opportunity calls, and what we've told them is to call sovereign wealth funds or somebody like that.
QUICK: So you're saying call the money that you think is dumb money on Wall Street?
BUFFETT: We'll call it innocent money, yeah.
Dave Grogan / CNBC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
QUICK: And--yeah.
BUFFETT: Yeah, and incidentally, that's what happens.
QUICK: Yeah.
BUFFETT: I mean, if you've got a great deal in this country, you don't have to go to Beijing, you know, or the Middle East to find somebody with money to fund it. It's like when oil prospectors would come up here from Texas and they'd say, `We got a wonderful deal for you in Texas,' I always thought, there are all these oil men in Texas, you know, why didn't they call on them?
QUICK: So you think the sovereign wealth funds are getting the raw end of the deal when they buy into some of the financials?
BUFFETT: I think that they are buying what is being sold to them, and in securities you should not buy what's being sold to you. You should buy what comes from your own analysis and looks the cheapest. The idea that somebody is going to come and call on you and say, you know, `Buy $2 billion worth--this is the best thing to buy in the world,' it isn't the best thing to buy in the world. The best thing to buy in the world is something that you've dug out and that people aren't talking about and that, you know, you find yourself. Securities that are being sold to you have a special push in it. Usually, there's extra commissions in them or all kinds of things. So I don't--I don't want to get ideas from other people, basically. I want to get ideas from a bunch of facts that I uncover someplace.
QUICK: A lot of people recently have been talking about the financials, which, once again, people are saying, `Hey, they are reaching levels that inherently make these stocks cheap.' You own some of the financials.
BUFFETT: Yeah, we own--we own some businesses that we think are good businesses and that if the stock market closed for the next three years I'd be happy owning. That's the real test. I mean, if you guy buy a farm, you don't get a quote on it every day. If you buy an apartment house, you don't get a quote on it every day. You look to the rents or you looked at the crop in the case of the farm. We look to the business. So if I buy stock in a financial, what I'm--what I'm looking at is where I think they'll be in five or 10 years, and I can't pick bottoms. I don't think anybody can. I do want to stay away from the ones that I think are kind of dumbly managed.
QUICK: American Express, Wells Fargo, those are two of your big holdings...
BUFFETT: Right.
QUICK: ...in the financial arena. If you see prices come down and something you've already decided you like this business, if the prices come down, do you buy more?
BUFFETT: Sure.
QUICK: Are you buying more?
BUFFETT: Well, I bought more of one of those, you know, in recent--in recent months.
QUICK: Either American Express or Wells Fargo?
BUFFETT: Now you've got it narrowed down. They--incidentally, both of those companies were started by the same guy, as I--Wells and Fargo started American Express.
QUICK: What makes you look around and think, `Hey, things are getting better'? What would it take to convince you that, `OK, this is'--or is it just simply prices are too cheap and they shouldn't get there?
BUFFETT: Yeah, I don't--if I were going to buy a farm, I know they're going to have a drought, we'll say, two years out of 10. I know prices are going to be lousy, we'll say, two years out of 10. I would rather buy it during the drought, you know, and--or when prices are bad because, you know, I know what it's going to do over time, and the test is to buy it as cheap as you can, something that--where you really have a pretty good fix on what it's going to look like over 10 years. And you're much more likely to buy it when times are bad then when times are good.
QUICK: Is now a time, though, when you'd be looking around at financials you'd never owned a stake in before? Simply because prices have come down, do you start doing more homework? Not something that's getting pitched at you, but do you start looking around to see if anything says, `OK, this one's getting unfairly tarnished'?
BUFFETT: I'm reading far more 10-Ks in the last few months than I've been reading--far more than I was reading three years ago. Yeah, there's--there are more potentially good ideas out there than there were three years ago, and some them are in financials. I mean, I'm looking all the time. And the cheaper they get, the harder I'll look.
QUICK: And you're not just talking about companies here in the United States.
BUFFETT: No.
QUICK: You're looking outside the United States as well.
BUFFETT: Right. Yeah.
QUICK: Is there a particular country that you think is inherently--like with South Korea a few years ago, you said, `Hey, there's got to be some bargains.' Is there another particular country that you look at and say, `Hey, I don't know what they are, but there's got to be something good in there?'
BUFFETT: Well, it's not like South Korea a few years ago. South Korea, you could just turn the page--you could throw darts, you know, with South Korea, and those stocks were really, really cheap. I mean, it's astounding how cheap they were and the world ignored it. PetroChina was ridiculously cheap a few years back, but I--we need to find big things, so I have to look at market caps that are large, and that rules out a whole bunch of countries, because the businesses just aren't that large. And I have to feel I sort of understand the political climate, the taxation climate, that sort of thing, and the attitude towards shareholders. But there's a lot of countries on that, but there's none--nothing--there's nothing like South Korea was five years ago.
QUICK: All right. When you look at what's happening with commodities, we saw a huge boom in commodity prices. We've seen a huge retracement. Oil prices all of a sudden back up around $120 a barrel. But do you think this volatility in commodities prices, has any of that caught you by surprise?
BUFFETT: Well, the dollar's become worth less.
QUICK: Yeah.
BUFFETT: So to the extent that they're quoted in dollars, they haven't gone up as much in Euros or some other kind--in Brazil, the Brazilian currency, you know, has more than doubled against the American currency, so when we look at soybean prices, which happens to be a big product there, it hasn't changed relatively the same way. But, you know, the surprising thing may be that commodities stayed down as low as they were for as long as they did. What happened in oil, we had a change in the supply and demand balance, and that's big in markets. That's what you had in the rail industry, for example. I mean, anytime you get those fundamental changes where, in the case of the rail industry, over a 25-year period the amount of actual rail in the United States declined by 20-odd percent while the ton miles increased 60-some percent. Well, that changes the pricing dynamics, and, you know, that's gone on in oil. It changed the dynamics that there's not a buffer supply like there was five years ago.
QUICK: Which is why you've also bought in to some of the railroad stocks.
BUFFETT: That--I should have done it much earlier. I really missed it entirely. I mean, you could just sit there and watch ton miles go up, rail go down, at some point the pricing power shifts. And, you know, it was ridiculous what the whole rail industry was selling for 10 years ago, and it was also ridiculous that I didn't spot it.
QUICK: But you think that this is still a good place for an investment. You're there for the long haul?
BUFFETT: Well, I'm, as we say in the rail industry, I'm there for the long haul. No, I--we'll be--we've got a big position in Burlington Northern [BNI Loading... () ].
QUICK: Burlington, right.
BUFFETT: We'll own it a long time.
QUICK: Warren, we're going to have much more coming up. Again, folks, if you are just tuning in, we are live with the legendary investor in his hometown of Omaha, Nebraska. Much more to discuss this morning. A lot of ground to cover, including what has him a little hot under the collar this morning. Yeah, you don't want to miss a minute of this.
CONTINUED: WHY CONTRIBUTORS SHOULD SUE JOHN EDWARDS
QUICK: All right. Welcome back, everybody, once again, we are live in Omaha, Nebraska this morning. You know, one of the things that the nation is watching is next week, the first of the conventions kicks off, the Democratic National Convention. Originally, John Edwards was expected to be speaking at that convention, but after some revelations and a spectacular fall about--some revelations about his private life, he will no longer be speaking at the convention. Warren, you're somebody who has been supporting Barack Obama. Did you ever give money to John Edwards along the way?
BUFFETT: No, I didn't--I didn't give money to John Edwards. And, in fact, I think if I'd given money to him, I'd probably be asking for it back now. It's an interesting situation because John Edwards essentially was soliciting money from people to further his ambitions for the presidency, and, you know, people sent him 50, $100, $200, and I would say that they sent it in while they were being misled by the person who was soliciting the money from them. And, you know, I think if I were Edwards, I might give up a haircut or two and refund at least, you know, the people that gave the 50 or $100, $200 items, because they-- if they had known the facts, they wouldn't have sent him the money, and he is the guy that didn't give them the facts. I mean, he knew that, in effect, he wouldn't be elected president. I mean, the story was out there during the campaign. He denied it, but it was out there. And, in fact, I've never heard of it, but it might be kind of interesting if somebody, some contributor, would bring a class-action suit on behalf of all these people who essentially were led to send money to a man under totally false circumstances, false pretenses, and where he knew it and didn't tell them the truth.
QUICK: Hm, that'd be ironic for a trial lawyer...
BUFFETT: Yeah.
QUICK: ...to have a class-action lawsuit brought against him.
BUFFETT: I've seen a lot of class-action suits with less to it than this particular case. The facts are clear. I mean, he solicited money and he wasn't telling the truth to the people he was soliciting it from.
QUICK: How--have you had any discussions? I mean, obviously, you talked to a lot of people who are high ranked in the Democratic Party. Is that something that's been thrown around out there, or did you cook this up yourself?
BUFFETT: No, I don't think--I don't think I've heard of that. The--I don't talk to a lot of class-action lawyers, but I really think--I think those people were defrauded. They sent money under--with the person who was soliciting the money from them misinforming them even when the National Enquirer came out with it during his campaign, he kept soliciting money and saying it isn't true. I would think that they--it might be a pretty good class-action suit.
QUICK: Even to this day, he says that he--they had 99 percent of it wrong, even in the most recent interview John Edwards came up with, although he admits that he did have an affair with a woman.
BUFFETT: Well, he would have a chance at a class-action suit to respond to that.
QUICK: All right. Again, you've been supporting Obama, though.
BUFFETT: Absolutely.
QUICK: Are you going to the convention next week?
BUFFETT: No, I'm going to be in Denver one night, but I won't actually be at the convention at all, no.
QUICK: OK, but Obama has been somebody you've been supporting. Obama has some policies that don't necessarily jive with your views, specifically windfall profits tax.
BUFFETT: Yeah.
QUICK: What do you think about the windfall profit...
BUFFETT: Well, the only way you get somebody that jives with all your views is to run yourself, and I have no interest in that. The test is between two people.
QUICK: Mm-hmm.
BUFFETT: But I think--I think a windfall profits tax on oil does not make any sense. I mean, I--soybeans have gone up. Wheat's gone up. Iron ore's gone up, and those are commodities that are going up because the commodity markets have driven the prices up, and nobody's suggesting a tax, a special tax on some farmer because his corn has gone up in price or on a wheat farmer in Kansas because his wheat has gone up in price or an iron ore producer. And the oil companies are easy to pick on, but it's a world price. It isn't--is not set by ExxonMobil or anybody else. And I'm sure they're happy to have it, but the idea of taxing somebody just because their services of what they sell have gone up in price a lot, taxing them in some special way doesn't make sense to me.
QUICK: It's been an idea that's been thrown out there. Do you believe that Obama's campaign and Obama himself actually will push that through, or is this something that gets thrown to the wayside?
BUFFETT: Well, a lot of things get thrown to the wayside, and that'll be true of things put out by both candidates. I mean, I do not expect perfection in candidates. I mean, it--you know, every saint has a past, every sinner has a future, you know, so--it's a terrible mistake to expect perfection. What you do--what you do hope to get is very high-grade, very intelligent people who have the public interest at heart, who have to make various compromises in terms of getting into office, and you hope to--you hope to attract those kind of people. I think we've got two of those in this campaign, but I much prefer Obama.
QUICK: OK. We'll have more on this topic a little later. Warren Buffett, again, is going to be with us for the rest of the hour, so we do have much more to talk about. We are live from his hometown of Omaha, Nebraska.
CONTINUED: BUFFETT ON THE OLYMPICS
CARL QUINTANILLA, co-anchor (Beijing):
Warren, I know you've been a fan of the games. You've probably been watching somewhat. Is there an event that appeals to you the most? I mean, are you--do you want baseball to come back in a big way as an Olympic sport?
BUFFETT: I love it all, but it's hard to beat a race that's decided by 1/100th of a second, and...
QUINTANILLA: Yes.
BUFFETT: ...and actually, the 100 meter, even though it's over so fast, I mean, it--to watch a guy sort of breeze across there in a time like Bolt did it, it's an unbelievable event.
QUICK: Hey, Darren, we were watching the clips, Darren, we were watching the clips here, and Warren had something to say when we watched you in your Speedo diving into the pool. Warren, what did you give him?
BUFFETT: I gave him a 4.3.
QUICK: A 4.3.
BUFFETT: But I'm an easy grader.
QUICK: Guys...
DARREN ROVELL: Well, I didn't try too hard. I didn't try too hard there.
QUINTANILLA: Yeah.
ROVELL: It was for effect.
QUINTANILLA: Becky...
BUFFETT: The degree of difficulty was minus one.
QUICK: OK.
QUINTANILLA: There you go. That's right. And that--touche. Give me one second, Bec, just to say one thing.
(Quintanilla thanks CNBC and NBC people on Olympics coverage, Becky and Warren thank Quintanilla and Rovell)
THIS IS PART SIX OF "THREE HOURS WITH WARREN BUFFETT - LIVE FROM OMAHA" ON CNBC'S SQUAWK BOX WITH BECKY QUICK, FRIDAY, AUGUST 22, 2008.
Announcer: This is a special edition of SQUAWK BOX live from the Holland Performing Arts Center in the heart of beautiful Omaha, Nebraska. Now, once again, here's Warren Buffett and Becky Quick.
BECKY QUICK, co-anchor (Omaha, Nebraska): Welcome back, everyone, to SQUAWK BOX here on CNBC, first in business worldwide. We are just one hour away from the opening bell right now. Again, we've been watching the futures higher through the morning. We've been spending a lot of time this morning with Warren Buffett and he's been answering questions from followers across the country. If you see right now, the Dow futures are, in fact, close to 100 points above fair value, but let's head back to California to get a question of--from one of you at home.
Unidentified Man #1: What are the odds that we could have a bank failure similar to the 1929 era?
QUICK: Warren, that question was, again, what are the odds that we could have a bank failure similar to what we saw in 1929?
WARREN BUFFETT (Berkshire Hathaway CEO): Well, that's quite unlikely, partly because of the FDIC. People--you had failures in the Great Depression where the failure of Bank A caused the failure of Bank B. When they saw a line at Bank A, everybody lined up at Bank B and then they lined up at Bank C. And the FDIC was one of the great ideas of the Depression. You've got terrific woman, Sheila Bair, running that. So we won't see failures simply because there's a wave of failures elsewhere. What we'll see here are failures where the banks were dumb in what they did and you will see a fair number of those. We had a huge number of bank failures in this Midwest area, including Nebraska, in the early 1980s when there was a farm bubble. Where there's been a real estate bubble and the bankers have participated big time, you'll see some bank failures, but you will not see any losses to anybody that--in terms of FDIC covered accounts of 100,000 or under, so nobody needs to worry about their $80,000 account at any bank, even though the bank may have been run in a dumb way.
QUICK: Although you've said it before that the financial system is much more intertwined and linked than it had been in the past, especially when you start looking at some of the investment banks and beyond. Do you worry about that?
BUFFETT: Well, that's why the Fed had to rush in on Bear Stearns.
QUICK: Right.
BUFFETT: I mean, they weren't--they weren't worried about Bear Stearns, they were worried about the consequences of Bear Stearns toppling and then the domino action following, which would've happened in my view. I think they made exactly the right decision. There's enormous interconnection and derivatives have accentuated that in a big way so that trouble spread. And even if you made sound loans getting 10 or 20 percent down, if the other guy made a bunch of dumb loans and that causes a huge supply of houses and house prices, appreciation, and even the better loans can get impaired to some degree. So nobody gets insulated from the problems of the economy. And if you're a bank, you feel some of those effects no matter how prudent you've been over time. But there's not going to be a wise--there's not going to be bank failures happening just because there's other banks fail.
QUICK: Could there be another Bear Stearns this time around, though?
BUFFETT: Sure. People--and I've said that you only find out who's been swimming naked when the tide goes out.
QUICK: Mm-hmm.
BUFFETT: Well, Wall Street has turned out to be a nudist beach. I mean, there's--there've been plenty of people that pushed balance sheets extremely hard. I mean, there was virtually no limit on credit. People, anything was going in the credit market and they were mispricing credit, they were--they were overleveraging and now the truth comes out as people start looking with, you know, some care at what's really on the liability side and the asset side of these banks. A long time ago there was a movie producer holding an annual meeting and one of his shareholders said in the film, you know, `I don't understand all these figures, Mr. Scurus,' or whatever his name was. `What do they mean?' And the CEO said, `Well,' he said, `I don't really understand them very well, either.' But he said, `But I can tell you this, the liabilities are good.' Well, that's what you find out in a period like this. The assets may not be so hot, but the liabilities are good and then that's when the trouble begins.
QUICK: When people start looking around to find the next potential Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers is the name that comes up again and again. Should people be concerned about what's happening at Lehman?
BUFFETT: I don't think it's appropriate, really, to talk about financials.
QUICK: Financials, in particular, banks.
BUFFETT: No. I think that--I really think that's inappropriate to talk about them.
QUICK: Do you think that's caused...
BUFFETT: I have no problem talking about Fannie and Freddie because the government stands behind them.
QUICK: Do you think that's part of what caused the problems with Bear Stearns, though? Once the rumors get out, once the media picks up on it, once the names came back again and again? Is that...
BUFFETT: If you had a $400 billion balance sheet and 400 or so billion of stated equity underneath it, that means that you're dependent on the kindness of strangers every day.
QUICK: Mm-hmm.
Dave Grogan / CNBC |
|
|
发表于 2008-8-27 23:25